This supplemental content includes four tables (Tables S1–S4) summarizing the result obtained for all broadband seismic stations over the validation period, detailed analysis of the estimated sensor-misorientation angles from the three methods based on the different seismic networks, comparison between the estimates from this study and stations with reported sensor orientations, and suspected stations affected by polarity reversal and/or channel mislabeling.
Table S1. A summary of the result obtained for all broadband seismic stations included in this study over the validation period. Angles are reported in degrees. Values of 0 in columns 8–16 means no result exists for that particular station and method. Stations with a validation end date of 11 December 2018 are active as of the time of this study.
Table S2. A detailed analysis of the estimated sensor-misorientation angles from the three methods based on the different seismic networks included in the study. Values of 0 imply no value exists for that cell, and angles are reported in degrees.
Table S3. A comparison between the estimates from this study and stations with reported sensor orientations. Angles are reported in degrees. Values of 0 in columns 8–16 means no result exists for that particular station and method. Stations with a validation end date of 11 December 2018 are active as of the time of this study.
Table S4. List of suspected stations affected by polarity reversal and/or channel mislabeling in the study area. They have a mean sensor-misorientation angle close to 180°. Angles are reported in degrees. Values of 0 in columns 8–16 means no result exists for that particular station and method. Stations with a validation end date of 11 December 2018 are active as of the time of this study.
A time embargoed link to an Excel sheet version of the tables is placed at https://zenodo.org/record/2658716 (last accessed August 2019).
[ Back ]